Comment Quanta are nothing? (Score 1) 612
I'm trying to understand the OP's acceptance of the openly flawed basal logic of the paper. The paper depends on the potential occurrence of a "small true vacuum bubble" created per Heisenberg's theory in what is called a "Metastable False Vacuum" - By definition, the insertion of the word "False" immediately destroys the OP's premise that this describes something coming from nothing. This theoretical "metastable false vacuum" is not nothing. It is by definition "Something" which mathematically appears to be "nothing". All that this paper seems to have proven is that theoretically, if there was something that looked like nothing, something could theoretically have come from it. This brings us (unsurprisingly) no closer to any proof that something could come from nothing. Of course, brilliant idiots the world over will jump on this paper, just like they jumped on the concept of a "Metastable False Vacuum" to tout their "proof" that despite the fact that everyone with a grain of common sense understands that nothing comes from nothing, they know that we are wrong.